Northwest can Balance Electrons and Salmon

IS the Pacific Northwest's high-flying economy about to
crash? The outlook certainly seems grim. Shock waves
from California's energy crisis ripple through the region,
just as Mother Nature sets the table for a major drought.
Families struggle to pay higher utility bills, "Closed" signs
appear on factory gates, and commentators tell us what to
do when the lights go out. Memories of droughts past
raise the specter of barren farmlands stretching to the
horizon, wildfire infernos, and dying fish flopping in the
dried mud of stilled streams.

The good news is that the crisis may not last long, easing
as the rains return next fall and new generators come on
line next year. Thus, the primary challenge is one of crisis
management: Let's tighten seatbelts and encourage the
pilots to do whatever it takes to maintain our economic
altitude through the next 12-18 months of turbulence. If a
few drinks get spilled by the bumps, don't worry, they can
be cleaned up later, as things settle down and the flight to
the airport of economic prosperity resumes.

Sounds good, but it isn't that simple. Today's
crisis-management decisions will determine not just how
well the economy survives the crisis, but also how much
fuel it has left, the amount of damage to the engines, and
the direction it is headed when the turbulence ends. Make
the wrong decisions now and the economy will have a
bumpy ride for years, even decades.

One of the toughest decisions we face is how to balance
electrons against salmon. Flushing water through turbines
at hydroelectric dams generates more electricity, but
drains the reservoirs of water originally intended for
carrying juvenile salmon to the ocean this spring, thus
raising the risk that salmon will die, maybe even go
extinct.

In the frenzy of crisis management, the decision may
seem simple. The Pacific Northwest can have more
electrons and maintain a healthy economy or have healthy
salmon runs, but it cannot have both. Seen this way,
salmon are a luxury the region can ill afford. Running the
turbines full-tilt also has the side benefit of ensuring that
the Bonneville Power Administration will have enough
money in the bank to make its next $700 million payment
to the federal Treasury.

Furthermore, the prices are compelling: If power is worth
50 cents per kilowatt-hour on the wholesale market and
BPA can generate it for 2 cents, then, of course, the
prudent thing is to generate as much as possible.

But take a deep breath or two, and consider the long-run
consequences. Salmon are not a luxury but an integral
part of the region's economy. Lose them and the region
loses much of the spiritual and cultural core of what it
means to live in the Pacific Northwest. The region also
loses countless recreation and commercial-fishing jobs
directly associated with salmon and, more important, jobs
that materialize because salmon help create a quality of
life that makes the Pacific Northwest especially attractive
to workers, families, business managers and investors.

In short, lose the salmon and the Pacific Northwest loses
much of the fuel for long-run economic growth, damages
one of the economy's most powerful engines, and finds
itself headed toward an economic future not nearly as
prosperous as one that includes both healthy salmon runs
and a healthy economy.

Maybe flushing water through the turbines is a risk we
must take and it won't result in salmon extinction. Even so,
any reductions in salmon populations will make it more
difficult - more expensive over a longer period of time - to
restore them to health. Who will bear the added cost? The
best option is for those who benefit from the electricity to
do so, and our utility managers should act now to ensure
that kilowatt-hours embodying extra risks for salmon and
our economic future are sold with a price premium over
those that do not.

There are other things we can do to hold down the
economic costs of the electricity crisis and the pending
drought. The most obvious is to aggressively pursue
electricity and water conservation. Over the past year, we
and colleagues at the Center for Watershed and
Community Health (at Portland State University)
documented several hundred examples of businesses in
this region that invested in resource conservation and
saw their profits increase. Conservation by governmental
agencies resulted in reduced costs and expanded public
services. With appropriate technical and financial
encouragement, others can realize similar results, boost
the economy, and make the environment healthier for
salmon and humans.

At the same time, we can also wring more economic
benefit from our limited electricity and water supplies.
Some of this already is happening, as electricity is
diverted from aluminum production, where each
kilowatt-hour produces small net increases in prosperity,
to businesses and households where electricity has a
higher value.

Leasing water rights from unprofitable farmers, so that
water stays in streams instead of irrigating crops, is
another important option, since more water is withdrawn
from streams for irrigation than for any other use. Leasing
water from farmers has an added benefit this year, when
high electricity costs for irrigation pumps and low prices
for farm products mean the payments farmers receive for
leaving water in the stream may exceed what they could
earn from raising a crop.

New technologies that manage household and business
energy use during peak demand are yet another option.

Will the Pacific Northwest's economy plummet during this
crisis? Probably not. The far greater risk is that
shortsighted decisions during the crisis will leave it
sputtering long after the crisis has faded into memory.